On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Sven Schreiber wrote:
It seems (not proven yet, just tentatively) the small number is
coming
from the cdf() function.
Now, the remark I'm about to make is so general and abstract that the
chances that I'm in fact just uttering rubbish is very high, but:
calculating CDFs in non-trivial cases (eg the Gaussian) works *reasonably*
well in a *reasonably* small interval. For example, cnorm() is to be
trusted between -6 and 6, roughly. Outside that range, anything can
happen. If your model pushes the calculation of a CDF in such a way that
you need that ridiculously high level of precision, then I would guess
something's wrong with your model or with your data.
That said, any piece of software should do its best to ensure it gives
reliable and predictable results in the largest range of cases possible,
so any improvement in that direction is welcome.
-------------------------------------------------------
Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti
Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali (DiSES)
Università Politecnica delle Marche
(formerly known as Università di Ancona)
r.lucchetti(a)univpm.it
http://www2.econ.univpm.it/servizi/hpp/lucchetti
-------------------------------------------------------